The discussion assignment provides a forum for discussing relevant
topics for this week based on the course competencies covered. Use the
textbook, lectures and scholarly outside sources to support your work. As
in all assignments, cite your sources in your work and provide references
for the citations in APA format. Post the answers to both parts in one
discussion post and do not attach documents.
Scenario 1 � Video Games
You just bought a new gaming system. You are playing the game for the
first time with your friend, Ted, who loses almost every game. All of a
sudden, Ted grabs the playing device out of your hands, holds it like he
is going to hit you, and screams that if he loses one more time, he�s
going beat you with the gaming device. As he is throwing the controller at
you, a short in the controller causes it to electrify, electrocuting you and
Ted and causing a fire in your home. There was significant damage to
your home, and you and Ted both suffered physical injuries. You can no
longer play video games without having flashbacks.
What if any torts might Ted have committed? Explain
TORT CASES 2
Can any tort claims be raised against the gaming system manufacturer?
If so, explain.
What legal defenses might be raised to these claims and what remedies
might be sought for the damage and injuries?
Tort Cases
Name
Institution
TORT CASES 3
Tort Cases
Part A
In the case of Ted, it can be summed that he committed negligence tort given that the he did not
follow expected code of conduct in the use of the video game. Their accident is as a result of
deliberate action, carelessness from Ted resulting in complete harm and damage. Negligence
torts transpire when a person fails to act reasonably and therefore jeopardizes the safety of others
around them. In this scenario, Ted satisfies the position of a negligence tort considering his
actions.
The gaming system manufacturer can be sued for strict liability tort given that there were injury
and destruction of property accounted as a result of Ted actions. Strict liability can be imposed
on the manufacturing company without proof of negligence or fault provided there are injuries
which are provided in this case (Van Dam, 2011).
The defendant can evade the claim by proving that the plaintiff’s actions were a misuse and
abuse of the product in a way that was not intended or foreseen. Thus, the injury and damage are
not entirely the defendant but the plaintiff’s.
Part B
The civil cases main parties involved are the plaintiff as Starbucks Corporation and Starbucks
U.S Brand whereas on the defendant side is the Wolfe. The intellectual dispute involved in this
case is federal trademark infringement and unfair competition. The case holds some degree of
similarity in the federal. Trademark between Starbuck and Charbucks mark contain some
TORT CASES 4
similarity that affected the trademark of the two companies. The case was ruled against
Starbucks; the court claimed there was a trademark dilution that caused unfair competition
between the two companies
TORT CASES 5
References
Matheson, J.A. & Gelchinsky, J. M. (2010). Starbucks Corp. v. Wolfe�s Borough Coffee, Inc.,
588 F.3d 97 (2d Cir. Dec. 3, 2009)’ Finnegan, Washington, DC
Van Dam, C. (2011). Tort Law and Human Rights: Brothers in Arms On the Role of Tort Law in
the Area of Business and Human Rights. Journal Of European Tort Law, 2(3), 221-254.
